Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2018/04/20 15:58:25
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
So here's my attempt at a Maynerkh list, I really like that Kutlakh has the 24" diameter bubble of advance+charge and wanted to play to that with some aggressive crons. The idea is having the scarabs, wraiths, and Lychguard with Kutlakh advancing up to tie up gunlines hopefully wreck face with immortals and warriors going to grab objective while they and and the destroyers pop off shots to remove units that aren't tied up. Easy to say but harder to do. Translocation beams means being able to hide behind LoS blocking terrain and then directly moving through it and/or screens as we to get at juicer targets while Kutlakh's bubble is large enough that its should be easy enough to keep the canoptek units in it. I figure with the two wraiths and scarab unit it presents a choice hard choice of what to shoot at so that giving the Lychguard abit of more survivability despite not having a Inv save as it is 20 wounds to chew through though that not a guaranteed thing.
Its not a optimized list, but it is made for a friendlier meta that encourages enjoyable games. I would however like some feedback on how it could be optimized and made competitive for the local tournaments while sticking to the spirit of the list if possible.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/20 15:59:20
Vorradis 75th "Crimson Cavaliers" 8.7k
The enemies of Mankind may employ dark sciences or alien weapons beyond Humanity's ken, but such deviance comes to naught in the face of honest human intolerance back by a sufficient number of guns.
2018/04/20 16:09:19
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Ir0njack wrote: So here's my attempt at a Maynerkh list, I really like that Kutlakh has the 24" diameter bubble of advance+charge and wanted to play to that with some aggressive crons. The idea is having the scarabs, wraiths, and Lychguard with Kutlakh advancing up to tie up gunlines hopefully wreck face with immortals and warriors going to grab objective while they and and the destroyers pop off shots to remove units that aren't tied up. Easy to say but harder to do. Translocation beams means being able to hide behind LoS blocking terrain and then directly moving through it and/or screens as we to get at juicer targets while Kutlakh's bubble is large enough that its should be easy enough to keep the canoptek units in it. I figure with the two wraiths and scarab unit it presents a choice hard choice of what to shoot at so that giving the Lychguard abit of more survivability despite not having a Inv save as it is 20 wounds to chew through though that not a guaranteed thing.
Its not a optimized list, but it is made for a friendlier meta that encourages enjoyable games. I would however like some feedback on how it could be optimized and made competitive for the local tournaments while sticking to the spirit of the list if possible.
Cool list! I've been messing around with ideas for Kutlakh. Just a reminder though, Kutlakh's bubble only applies to infantry, so your canoptek units will still have to use the stratagem to charge after advancing.
2018/04/20 17:33:44
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Link is in the spoiler. Looking forward to seeing what you guys think.
Cool, will watch when kids sleep
Something else: How do you build an army around the Vault, in my case for friendly games. And also one dynasty for entire army.
Deceiver seems nice to be able to bring all powers to bare from turn 1.
* Nihilakh lets you give it 3++ for the first turn it's up there. And your backline DDAs would like that.
* Sautekh means it can get that sweet +1 on all those teslas. And cloaktek could buzz around it to shoot mortal wounds with the staff and help heal the Vault
* Mephrit, novokh - no obvious synergy
* Nephrekh could deep strike it up turn two.. not 100% sold on that. Could dart around +6" in movement phase at expense of tesla, not entirely sold on that either. Could deep strike Spyder for healing, probably not worth it, could deep strike Wraiths nearby to take some of the heat of it
In the backline you'd probably need DDA to delivery the AP that it cannot. That too would favor nihilakh or sautekh.
2018/04/20 18:40:53
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Link is in the spoiler. Looking forward to seeing what you guys think.
Cool, will watch when kids sleep
Something else: How do you build an army around the Vault, in my case for friendly games. And also one dynasty for entire army.
Deceiver seems nice to be able to bring all powers to bare from turn 1.
* Nihilakh lets you give it 3++ for the first turn it's up there. And your backline DDAs would like that.
* Sautekh means it can get that sweet +1 on all those teslas. And cloaktek could buzz around it to shoot mortal wounds with the staff and help heal the Vault
* Mephrit, novokh - no obvious synergy
* Nephrekh could deep strike it up turn two.. not 100% sold on that. Could dart around +6" in movement phase at expense of tesla, not entirely sold on that either. Could deep strike Spyder for healing, probably not worth it, could deep strike Wraiths nearby to take some of the heat of it
In the backline you'd probably need DDA to delivery the AP that it cannot. That too would favor nihilakh or sautekh.
Nephrekh only works on swarms and infantry
The Nihilakh trait is nice, but if you use it pop it straight away, I was in two minds in a game that I played and activated it too late thinking I could survive the damage, a few unlucky dice rolls cost me the model (I still won at least)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/20 18:43:04
2018/04/20 18:46:55
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
From facebook, they additionally mentioned it was made in co-operation with the rules team so its as official as we have atm, baring an actual update of the faq.
2018/04/20 18:56:30
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Yeah, that's the thing. Deathmarks aren't on the table, so technically they still suffer from the same restriction.
I mean, in practice you wouldn't really want to drop them that deep in enemy lines anyway because they'll get nuked, but its still a curious interaction.
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
2018/04/20 20:12:33
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Yeah, that's the thing. Deathmarks aren't on the table, so technically they still suffer from the same restriction.
I mean, in practice you wouldn't really want to drop them that deep in enemy lines anyway because they'll get nuked, but its still a curious interaction.
Sure but that's not the crux of it.
The new restriction specifies "player's first turn"
If he drops in things on his deployment zone, it isn't my first turn any more. Had they wanted that, the only meaningful wording would have been "the first turn"
The same with monoliths or night scythes getting gunned down, it's no longer your first turn, it's his first turn (presuming you went first), so emergency beam in reinforcements.
You could even argue that of you go second, it's not your first turn of you beam in deathmarks in his first turn.
I couldn't bare to take the fight, but those are the words of the rule.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
punisher357 wrote: So what's the consensus on the Tesseract Ark now? Is it too limited? Too high costed? Or is it simply that the DDA just beats it out too easily
Mix and match, the T Ark offers valuable alternative weapons profiles. Have it roam around ik front of the DDArks to weather the charges with it's awesome flamer and awesome anti charging rule.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/20 20:20:09
2018/04/20 20:20:31
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
The wording actually states during a player's first turn, not during the player's first turn. I actually interpret this as meaning either player's first turn. I don't think it's the intention, but i wouldn't play my Deathmarks outside my deployment zone until the second battle round. I will, however, be giving some feedback to GW to have this clarified if and when these rules become official.
2000 Khorne Bloodbound (Skullfiend Tribe- Aqshy)
1000 Tzeentch Arcanites (Pyrofane Cult - Hysh) in progress 2000 Slaves to Darkness (Ravagers)
2018/04/20 20:27:13
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Tesseract Ark is the same as it's always been, it just has competition now with the Doomsday Ark.
Had another post-codex game yesterday and boy howdy do destroyers impress. They solo'd a freaking Leviathan Dreadnought the turn they came down, immediately making their points back. I'd be hard pressed to make any lists that didn't include a unit of Destroyers, Extermination Protocols is just too good.
2018/04/20 21:05:03
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
EnTyme wrote: The wording actually states during a player's first turn, not during the player's first turn. I actually interpret this as meaning either player's first turn. I don't think it's the intention, but i wouldn't play my Deathmarks outside my deployment zone until the second battle round. I will, however, be giving some feedback to GW to have this clarified if and when these rules become official.
It's unclear for sure, but a sensible person (yes yes, were talking GW rule writers I know), would then call it "the first turn", not "a player's first turn", thats additional specification effectively limiting it to the controlling player.
Clarification is obviously needed, but that wording allows us to use tomb world to bring units up with our fliers, and it allows deathmarks to work as designed. (they're not that dangerous, I too likely wouldn't waste them going after near his deployment zone)
2018/04/20 21:21:55
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
There is a difference between "round" and "turn" in 40k. The game is divided into set number of battle rounds, usually 5 in most missions. A round is then divided into two turns, one for each player.
2000 Khorne Bloodbound (Skullfiend Tribe- Aqshy)
1000 Tzeentch Arcanites (Pyrofane Cult - Hysh) in progress 2000 Slaves to Darkness (Ravagers)
2018/04/20 22:00:29
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
With new 5CP for battalion it's just too good to miss.
When i played last times opponents struggled to remove blob of 20 warriors unless they did dedicated shooting only them.
But it was veeery easy to kill 10 immortals to prevent reanimation. 240 pts for 20 warriors is a lot but they can cover much more ground and survive better than 10 immortals.
Did anyone have luck with CCB sniper? I'm really tempting to do this but do not know how good is it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/20 22:03:25
2018/04/20 22:19:28
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
EnTyme wrote: There is a difference between "round" and "turn" in 40k. The game is divided into set number of battle rounds, usually 5 in most missions. A round is then divided into two turns, one for each player.
Well, referring to it as "a player's first turn", and wanting it to mean the first battle round, arguably is beyond a slip of tongue. even for GW writers.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ArtyomTrityak wrote: With new 5CP for battalion it's just too good to miss.
When i played last times opponents struggled to remove blob of 20 warriors unless they did dedicated shooting only them.
But it was veeery easy to kill 10 immortals to prevent reanimation. 240 pts for 20 warriors is a lot but they can cover much more ground and survive better than 10 immortals.
Did anyone have luck with CCB sniper? I'm really tempting to do this but do not know how good is it.
20 Warriors certainly has those aspects going for it.
I haven't tried the snipe barge, but I'd like to give it a go soon.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/20 22:20:40
2018/04/20 22:27:22
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
EnTyme wrote: The wording actually states during a player's first turn, not during the player's first turn. I actually interpret this as meaning either player's first turn. I don't think it's the intention, but i wouldn't play my Deathmarks outside my deployment zone until the second battle round. I will, however, be giving some feedback to GW to have this clarified if and when these rules become official.
It's unclear for sure, but a sensible person (yes yes, were talking GW rule writers I know), would then call it "the first turn", not "a player's first turn", thats additional specification effectively limiting it to the controlling player.
Clarification is obviously needed, but that wording allows us to use tomb world to bring units up with our fliers, and it allows deathmarks to work as designed. (they're not that dangerous, I too likely wouldn't waste them going after near his deployment zone)
Player A goes first in the first Battle Round. Is that a player's first turn? Yes, it's Player A's first turn.
Player B goes second in the first Battle Round. Is that a player's first turn? Yes, it's Player B's first turn.
Also from Facebook:
Warhammer 40,000 wrote:If it's possible for the Deathmarks to fulfill all the requirements of the rules (close enough to the set up enemy, in their own deployment zone, more that 9 from enemy etc...) then they can [... use Ethereal Interception]. Otherwise - they can't.
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
2018/04/20 22:37:25
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
EnTyme wrote: There is a difference between "round" and "turn" in 40k. The game is divided into set number of battle rounds, usually 5 in most missions. A round is then divided into two turns, one for each player.
Well, referring to it as "a player's first turn", and wanting it to mean the first battle round, arguably is beyond a slip of tongue. even for GW writers.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ArtyomTrityak wrote: With new 5CP for battalion it's just too good to miss.
When i played last times opponents struggled to remove blob of 20 warriors unless they did dedicated shooting only them.
But it was veeery easy to kill 10 immortals to prevent reanimation. 240 pts for 20 warriors is a lot but they can cover much more ground and survive better than 10 immortals.
Did anyone have luck with CCB sniper? I'm really tempting to do this but do not know how good is it.
20 Warriors certainly has those aspects going for it.
I haven't tried the snipe barge, but I'd like to give it a go soon.
I've used sniper barge and it is amazing, though if your opponent realises it's potential be prepared for a lot of assassination attempts
2018/04/20 23:37:59
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
It's just a ccb with mephrit dynasty codes.... the mephrit warlord trait lets you snipe... you could use the voltaic staff too which is 12 inch range assault 3 str 6 ap-3 2dmg
Vorradis 75th "Crimson Cavaliers" 8.7k
~4100
~1660
2000 Khorne Bloodbound (Skullfiend Tribe- Aqshy)
1000 Tzeentch Arcanites (Pyrofane Cult - Hysh) in progress
2000 Slaves to Darkness (Ravagers)
